This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Other key defined terms in the Draft Regulations include: Technology , which means software or programs, including those derived from machinelearning, statistics, other data-processing techniques, or artificial intelligence. The Draft Regulations also provide that ADMT includes profiling.
Since we affirm the district court’s rulings on the state law claims, we need not resolve the federallaw cross appeal.” Letgo appeared first on Technology & Marketing Law Blog. That was an obviously problematic conclusion. Nevertheless, the Tenth Circuit dodges it: “We need not reach this issue.
The DCWP’s Automated Employment Decision Tool Law (the “AEDT Law” or the “Law”) requires covered employers to conduct annual independent bias audits and to post public summaries of those results. After issuing the Final Rules, the DCWP delayed enforcement of the Law for the second time from April 15, 2023 to July 5, 2023.
This is Part 2 in a two-part series of articles about facial recognition laws in the United States. In this part, we assess where the law seems to be heading and offer some practical risk reduction strategies. Federal and State Legislation There is currently no federallaw that specifically regulates biometric privacy.
This article briefly addresses this problem, summarizes current local, state, and federallaws enacted or proposed to curtail it, and proposes two solutions for modern employers itching to implement AI-assisted employee management tools but dreading employment litigation. New York City New York City is the clear leader on this front.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 5,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content